ASUS VG236H 23-inch 3D Display Review: 120Hz is the Future
by Brian Klug on August 7, 2010 2:48 AM ESTConclusions
This was the first 120Hz desktop LCD I’ve gotten time with, and even before I opened the box I had heard from all around that it’s held in very high regard. Regardless of how you feel about 3D, the VG236H is an awesome choice even from the perspective of its 120Hz refresh rate. Side by side with a traditional 60Hz LCD, the difference is striking. Further, instead of getting tearing above 60 FPS like you would with vsync off on a traditional 60Hz LCD, you get smoother gameplay that just looks more fluid. I definitely can tell the difference, and now I don’t want to go back.
With the 120Hz display, you’re really getting every frame at or below 120 FPS drawn to the screen. At that high of a response time, you definitively can’t see flicker. The result is a similar kind of ‘once you’ve experienced it, you can’t go back’ to a solid state drive.
But if you’re going to get the VG236, it’s worth it to go for the H model which bundles the 3D vision kit over the HE which excludes it, if nothing else so you can see 3D for yourself and decide if it’s worth it. It’s a shame that NVIDIA doesn’t bundle or subsidize copies of Metro 2033 or other 3D Vision Ready titles that really offer a level of gameplay and 3D polish that even ‘excellent’ and ‘good’ titles clearly lack.
Right now, the VG236H’s primary competition is the Acer GD235Hz, which, bundled with the 3D Vision kit, runs $545 on newegg. At $499 with the bundled 3D Vision kit, the VG236H looks like an undeniably better deal with the same specs on paper. The other primary contender is the Alienware OptX. Hopefully we’ll get our hands on these and compare.
As for the future, the real draw will be to larger screens and higher resolutions. In the immediate future, we’ll see a move to LED backlighting on these 120Hz panels. Once you try a 120Hz display, it’s hard to go back.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
121 Comments
View All Comments
synaesthetic - Monday, August 9, 2010 - link
If your livelihood depends on color accuracy, you can damn well bet it's worth spending money on. Monitors cheaper than $300 have terrible color reproduction.Seikent - Saturday, August 7, 2010 - link
I have the Samsung 2233RZ monitor (120 hz, 3d ready, 16:10), it is a bit cheaper than this one, but it has some limitations.I don't have the shutter glasses, but I don't care too much because I don't have a Nvidia card. I bought it just because the 120 hz refresh rate. Playing with vsync on is awesome, the visual experience is much better, it feels fluid and it is hard to go back. It is hard to understand because you can't see it how it feels without having this monitor in front of you. I recommend you to try one.
JGabriel - Saturday, August 7, 2010 - link
Brian King: "I’d say the vertical angle you get isn’t quite as advertised, but honestly if you’re viewing the monitor from so far down below that this is noticeable, you’re probably doing something wrong ..."Or viewing it in portrait mode after attaching it to a pivot arm. Really, Brian, that should have occurred to you, as you bragged about "rolling your own" only a few paragraphs earlier.
.
JGabriel - Saturday, August 7, 2010 - link
Whoops, sorry for getting your last name wrong, Brian. I mis-read it somehow. Apologies..
Brian Klug - Saturday, August 7, 2010 - link
I agree, but the primary weird viewing angle is from below. From above, it seems much better (like many other TN panels, which is quite typical). I've encountered exactly that issue before putting a TN panel in portrait, and it definitely isn't desirable.I would definitely not recommend doing that with this ASUS ;)
-Brian
FH123 - Saturday, August 7, 2010 - link
Are 3D games, like Metro 2033, any better than what we get to see at the cinema? I saw Avatar (the film) and thought the 3D effects were laughable. In many scenes I could discern at most 3 or 4 planes of depth and, within those planes, everything looked flat. For example there might be a computer monitor in the foreground, then Sigourney Weaver, then the background. Where 3D worked it was mostly when things popped into the foreground, but the actors faces and backgrounds usually looked completely flat. South Park immediately sprang to mind. The actors looked like cardboard cut-outs in front of a background picture.Am I the only one noticing this effect? I admit my experience is very limited, as I walked out of Avatar half-way through and haven't watched anything 3D since. Nor do I have the desire to. The 3D effect was jarring and the film lost much of it's brightness, contrast and color saturation. What's the point? I own a good (JVC) projector. Something well recorded and not over-processed like, say, Treme (the TV series), looks far better to me than what I saw at the cinema that day. Depth perception, in that case, comes from low black-levels and proper dynamic range. Less dramatic, but it seems better to me.
Having said that, perhaps there is some advantage games have over films, even films that rely heavily on CGI, such as Avatar? Do they, perhaps by virtue of having a depth coordinate for every pixel on the screen, give a better continuity of depth perception?
Brian Klug - Saturday, August 7, 2010 - link
I agree with you, so that weird senstation is partly an artifact of 3D being added in after the fact, and partly just poor cinematography.The nice thing about games is that the 3D models are there already and have much finer meshes. I'd say that on the whole, no, that experience of things only existing in a few planes of depth is completely absent from gaming in 3D in any of the games I've tested thus far.
-Brian
nvmarino - Saturday, August 7, 2010 - link
Brian, great review, thanks!One of the benfits of a true 120Hz display (120Hz at the input) you didn't mention are the benefits for HTPC usage - a framerate that's evenly divisible by 60 and 24 means you can output both 24fps and 60fps content without having to change the refresh rate in the video card settings. Any chance you can confirm if the monitor supports HDCP on the DVI input? Also, any chance you could see if the commercial Blu-ray players (i.e. PowerDVD, TMT3, and WinDVD) play nice when outputting @120hz? Would also be good to know if Windows Media Center has any issues when outputting @120Hz as well!
Also, one minor gripe about your review - I think you're incorrectly referring to the system you're testing as "3D Vision Surround". "3D Vision *Surround*" is when using 3D Vision with multiple displays. Since you're reviewing with a single display it's just "3D Vision"...
Brian Klug - Saturday, August 7, 2010 - link
Excellent catch on 3D Vision Surround versus 3D Vision, fixed that!I'll test to make sure, but I'm 90% certain that it supports HDCP. It'd be absolutely unforgivable to be shipping a monitor in 2010 without HDCP. Having HDMI onboard pretty much guarantees that at least that input does, but I'll double check. I don't expect any problems though.
-Brian
Brian Klug - Saturday, August 7, 2010 - link
Just tested with PowerDVD 10 Mark II Version 10.0.1830.51 and playback is perfect - tried a variety of BD titles. Looks good at 120Hz (no stuttering). HDCP apparently does work over the DVI-D datapath.-Brian